The archives should be at
Maris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael O'Connor" <omichael@optonline.net>
To: <mlidaka@Ameritech.Net>
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 11:44 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] Help with purchasing decision?
Hi, I've just joined the list, so I'm sorry if any ot these have been
discussed before, I haven't yet noticed a way to search archives.
I'm trying to make a decision on purchasing a film scanner and would
like to move ahead very soon.
Price is an issue for me, or I would already have purchased a Minolta
Multi Pro even if I don't really need the medium format capability.
My choices seem to be between the Minolta Scan Elite ll and the Microtek
Artixscan 4000tf, though I suppose I could also go for the Nikon 4000
from e-bay.
The Minolta is 2820 dpi but will output a full 16 bits and claims 4.8
dynamic range, the Minolta software seems to get good notice and they
include ICE 3 the lens also seems to be superior. The Microtek is 4000
dpi, claims a 4.2 (or 4.3) dynamic range, ships with Silverfast AI 5.5
and a full version of GF Print Pro.
I'm on a Mac platform, currently OS 9 but I anticipate this will change
soon to OS X.
Checking samples of the old Polaroid SS 4000 against the Nikon LS 4000 I
think actually that I prefer the shadow detail of the Polaroid over the
Nikon, though the Nikon does seem sharper. I say this since Microtek, as
far as i know, actually made the Polaroid.
I'm in a quandary. I anticipate that I will need to crop, and will want
to crop severely at times, so the resolution is important, Silverfast
always gets excellent note, and Print Pro seems very interesting though
probably isn't quite as good as its made to seem. But the lens quality
and bandwidth of the Minolta are very attractive, and ICE 3 would I'm
sure be helpful at times even if i think I'd prefer to spot "manually".
The Microtek is fairly new and i haven't seen any reviews. I'm concerned
with lens quality_sharpness, and also with any possible issues on a Mac.
Has anyone used either of these scanners? has anyone seen an in depth
review of the Artixscan 4000tf? Can anyone chime in on what they think
would be best to go for, and why? keeping in mind that though I wasn't
very sold from samples of the Nikon LS 4000 in terms of shadow detail,
and there seemed to be a good amount of color fringing on some of the
resolution target images, and I'm wary of reports of poor edge to edge
sharpness, and i'd rather purchase from a store/online retailer, I still
don't consider the LS 4000 to be definitely out of the picture.
Sorry for the meandering long-winded post, and thanks for any help you
can offer.
Michael O
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
